Sorry Jim,

Your trademark request has been categorically denied. Visage, the band, was formed circal 1978 by 2 members of the Rich Kids, Midge Ure and Rusty Egan along with Steve Strange who hosted club nights with Rusty in a London club called Blitz. The Rich Kids also included original Sex Pistol guitar player Glen Matlock (Who I will be seeing with original Ramone Tommy at a coffeehouse in Virginia in April). Visage would release 3 albums from 1980 to 1984 and had a top 10 hit in England with 'Fade to Gray'. During their early incarnation they were joined by Billy Curry from Ultravox while that band was on hiatus. Ultravox had a new wave dance hit with "Sleepwalk" in 1981. When Ultravox returned from their break Curry would rejoin that band and take Midge Ure with him.

Steve Strange continued the band in various forms that included musicians John McGeoch (Magazine, Siouxsie & the Banshees), Dave Formula (Magazine), Barry Adamson (Magazine, Buzzcocks, Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds) and in demand session saxaphonist and future producer Gary Barnacle (M, Kim Wilde, Elvis Costello, Soft Cell,Tina Turner, David Bowie and Pet Shop Boys). Strange still performs using that name and in 2012 he started recording a new Visage album.

Sorry to disappoint you. No money to be made on this. How did I know this to begin with? Started listening to the Sex Pistols in 1976. College radio in Boston 1979-82 playing everything from hardcore punk (Dead Kennedy's, Ramones, Pistols) to 1970's R&B to Miles Davis. Truly free form radio. Bouncer in a new wave dance club in Boston in 1980. Concert photography 1979 to date. Very broad spectrum of musical tastes. My personal Top 500 songs is all over the place - Disco Tex and the Sexolettes, Iggy Pop, Cat Stevens, Public Image Limited, Paul Anka etc. etc. And yes, it is written down.

Cheers,

Michael

"Shifty Visage" is not the same as "Visage."

Thank you David!

Michael, just remember this: Everything counts in large amounts.

I did not mean to derail this into a circle jerk with dead milkmen clashing with BHS.:)

This assumes that we fully trust the authenticators, thereby believing that their judgement need be impartial. Why doesn't Heritage just have Gutierrez do the authentications in house, and skip TPAs? Conflict of interest gone?

Leland's doesn't use third party authenticators. They use in-house people. For the most part, so does Coaches' Corner.

See my point? In the end, it is all about the item itself, just as it has always been. Do you guys think that if these TPAs didn't exist, Heritage would only be selling good stuff? I sure don't.

Very good. Quotation marks around 'shifty visage' would have been clearer to me, but you get that one. As long as you are not telling me to 'Wayne County and the Electric Chairs signature song' which is not repeatable here.

Whoever got this ball signed should have gotten Joe Giard to sign it, too. He's the key to the 1927 Yankees.

What I find most disturbing is that anyone one would pay that kind of money on the word of god knows who. Jim and PSA have a ton of people working for them. Who said the ball was good. I sure would like to know that. I would also ask Heritage if I could have at least two other opinions from people that I trust as well. If anyone of them said no that would be my exit from the auction.

We can also apply Shelly's "god knows who," to those who believe the ball is bad. So far, only Richard and Shelly have opined openly. Wouldn't it be nice to know who those other four "top of the hobby" experts are?

David, you forgot yourself:confused: The point I am trying to make is who within PSA and JSA decided that the ball was authentic. Not asking anymore than that.

You may not be asking any more than that, but I am.

I, too, would like to know who within JSA and PSA decided the ball was genuine.

I would also like to know which "top of the hobby" experts decided it wasn't.

David, my understanding is that Nash, whether anyone likes him or not has just posted about the ball. I am not fighting with anyone on this site. I am just saying without knowing who the hell the person was that said this ball is real I would not buy it and even if you who thinks it is real you would not buy it either. You well know that what we see is not always what we get.

Nash hasn't posted about this ball, has he?

The signatures are all very nicely evenly spaced, each appears to have been signed very slowly and carefully with the same amount of pen pressure, and each signer was careful not to mess up anyone else's signature. What more could you ask for in a '27 Yankees ball?

+++

Scott, the sweet is open. was it for Miller Huggins? I know everyone will say he he would not sign. My question is if this person was so respected and loved why not. He had like you said everyone sign in the perfect spot and not one mistake on the ball. No smears no skips and they asked Ty Cobb for his pen. I am sure for this perfect ball that the manger who would have the chance of his life time to sign on the sweet spot because you know who would always be there turned it down.:confused:

Like you say, it was Ty Cobb's pen. Cobb was probably standing there waiting to get his pen back, yelling "ya'll better not be writin yor damned Yankee names in my spot, ya hear?"

There are a lot of obvious problems, but 'Urban Shocker' is just horrid.

Shelly I think his name was Ray ....peace, out..:)
_________________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

:d:d:d:d:):):):):):)

David the count is now at 4-1 Scot, Richard, Jim and myself. 4
David 1 .
.
I know you will not believe this but I hope you are correct. I would hate to see someone through away that kind of money. I personally can not think that ball is anything but bad.

"Throw" away, Shelly. Not "through" away.

See? We all make mistakes.

JimStinson
 

Seriously and in all Fairness to the parties involved with regards to the authenticity of the ball , I don't think anyone including myself can say its a "slam dunk" Call one way or the other without actually physically examining it in person.

But as I stated in a previous post I would hope that on such a high dollar ticket as this that all due diligence was used with regards to provenance. And maybe or probably it was.

With ready access to census records, City Directories etc. the person or persons who made their determination, should have been able to back track almost to the source. Thats 90% of the work....then after thats complete and only after that is complete and CONCRETE...Examination of the actual item is obviously necessary but secondary
_____________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

With some here, Jim, it's always a slam dunk.

What did that mean:confused:

Precisely what it says, Shelly. Some here don't believe they could ever get it wrong.

David, what's wrong about being sure of yourself? Sometimes I am, sometimes I'm not. I have opinions about the Cy Young letter that Dan posted, but I'm not as confident as I am about this ball. I even compared this Yankees ball, signature for signature, with the signatures on the '27 ball that you now own, as well as with the one that you used to own. I did this because I'm trying to learn.

It was clear to me that your first ball, and this one, were signed by two different people, and neither of those two signed the ball that you currently own. To me, what I just stated was very obvious. But that's easy for me to say, since I'm not in the market for any of those three balls, so my opinion means absolutely nothing.

Scott, there's nothing wrong with being sure of yourself. There is something wrong, though, in believing you always speak Ex Cathedra.

(And, FWIW, you are not one of the people I had in mind.)

Thanks, I knew you weren't talking about me - I can be obnoxiously certain about cards and photos, but autographs are you guys' domain.

Last Saturday (Feb. 16th) someone on this board asked me my opinion on this baseball, and it is still my opinion that the autographs are authentic.

David, whether you think it or not. I do not believe there is not one person on this site that has not made more than a few mistakes. If you are talking about Richard I can guarantee he has. His knowledge of Jeter has gotten him in trouble over the years. I am only saying there are people I trust on here more than others. Some people just do not like to come on here and say "I made a mistake." I remember it took you a very long to time to admit your first 27 Yankee ball was not what you thought it was. There is no shame in being wrong.
I will say this again. I do hope I am wrong. I do not want to see someone loose money on just a few peoples opinion. People that we have no idea who they are. I agree with Jim. There can be a much greater back ground check on that ball that has yet to be done. I am sure that would give much more credence to the authenticity of said 27 Yankee ball.
Chris, do you think that anyone with a half of brain would not know who that person is? Just saying.
Last but not least why is everyone afraid to say who they are talking about. I heard, someone told me, a person on site. Just say there name.


Just a late addition to this thread. Nash has posted the questioned ball on his site.

Just read HOS. This response by Heritage is thought-provoking, but Heritage is working backward from the end product. Using this logic, if I signed a real 1927 ball, then because the ball is real, the signatures would be as well.

"The Combs team ball is the correct 1927 one-year style. So the suggestion that a supposed forger would have known this fact prior to the ball’s first public appearance in 1999, then could have tracked down a pristine example of that exceedingly rare style to use for his forgery, and lastly had the skill to perfectly execute these autographs to pass the finest authenticators in the industry is truly preposterous."

Compare the panel locations of each signature to the locations on David's authentic ball, or any other '27 Yankees ball, real or fake. Only the green ball has all the starters (except Collins) neatly grouped on two panels, all the pitchers (except Shawkey) on the same panel, all the catchers and coaches on another. Has anyone ever seen a ball where the signatures were organized this way?

It explains why Gehrig and Ruth avoided the sweet spot, but other than that it's just a little bit weird.

Which makes even more sense for a forger to simply go down the roster list....Where was Huggins on that roster list...:confused:

Supposedly, Combs went from player-to-player getting this ball signed. It's certainly not hard to imagine that he wanted them grouped by position--outfield, infield, pitchers, catchers, mgr & coaches. It makes sense to me that a player on that team might do that. It does not make sense to me that a forger skilled enough to have produced those signatures would just "go down the roster."

And, BTW, there is a Huggins on that ball.

That would be highly unusual (unique?), but I could buy that argument. What I can't buy is the slow deliberate signature of each player, perfectly spaced, same pressure applied. And even if you believe that all of those characteristics, along with the odd grouping method, there's still the actual characteristics of the signatures - at least a few of them are really horrible - how do you get past the end of 'Gehrig'? I couldn't even find one example where the 'rig' looks like the one on this ball. Gehrig had such a light, beautiful signature that it's hard for me to believe anyone could view this one as his.

I have some work to do, but I'll try to post images of the signatures on your ball, next to the ones on this one. It's kind of startling.

the signatures crowd each other, ruth crowds the signature above it.

would ruth really make a concerted effort to carefully crowd the autograph above it to make room for everyone else, perhaps, or would he just let a babe ruth autograph rip? historically he signed very fast. it doesnt look like a fast fluid ruth, it looks planned and stodgy.

tony lazzeri starts his signature way to the left, on the stamping, why? just so the end of his signature can coincide with the end of gehrigs? why? so the postiion designations can all line up? there was plenty of room for lazzeri to start his siganture farther to the right, but he starts it on the stamp? weird. most of the signatures seem to start in a vertical line and a lot of them seem to end in sync too.

can anyone find any other ball like that? not saying it could be impossible, but i believe in entropy. things tend to be disordered, and over a dozen guys signing a ball, their signatures are going to be more disordered. and not line up so unnaturally like this.

Look. Combs brings the ball to each player and tells him where to sign. It ain't that hard to understand.

You are talking about the 27 Yankees. I would think to have that perfect storm would be so strange that you and I would agree on anything. By the way Richard is Jewish so he would have no chance to have papal infallibility.:D

What are you talking about, Shelly? Perfect storm? WTF?

Players keep signed souvenirs of teams they played on. I've seen Gehrig's personal scrapbooks at the HoF library. He had the player photo page from the 1926 WS program, signed in beautiful, bold, black fountain pen by every teammate appearing there. George Pipgras had the famous 1927 team photograph signed by every player. I could go on. It's not so hard to believe that Combs had that ball signed for himself.

Please do go on. Your background on the 27 Yankees is well known and respected. I just think that this ball stinks.

Is this really a good Gehrig? Maybe he just wasn't himself that day.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion, Shelly.

I think it is.

Derek,
FWIW, you just mentioned an extremely trustworthy, long-time dealer in this hobby, Kevin Savage. That being said, Kevin's forte is not high end game used memorabilia.

I believe it is an authentic Gehrig sig.

Chris and David - thank you. You are both much more knowledgeable about Yankees signatures than I am. I've really enjoyed discussing autographs in this forum, and appreciate how respectful the conversations have been - even if I end up being wrong about this, it's been a lot of fun digging around and learning.

I just hope I don't try to bid in the next Heritage auction and find a giant stop sign.

Scott, as far as the Gehrig is concerned you are correct he had a really,really bad signing that day.:D
You are a very smart person. I think that someone that looks from the outside in is much brighter than we are.:)

Yeah, Shelly. The less experience with a particular signature, the more valuable the opinion. I suppose someone who's never seen a Gehrig signature at all would have the most valuable opinion. (And Jim's, of course, is worthless.)

David, you nailed it. Sometimes what you just said is completely true, but probably only if the inexperienced person has a good eye for autographs and the experienced one doesn't. But anyone can make mistakes.

I just re-read my post and I see how that was confusing, but I was not trying to lump Savage, nor Heritage for that matter, in with Coaches Corner. I was only trying to state that I see a lot of auction adverts in SCD and when something as notable as this '27 Yanks ball was called into question, it made me wonder how reputable any one of the houses really is. Sorry for the confusion, no offense intended towards Savage or anyone else. I have never dealt with auction houses, so I'm trying to find out from the people here who have expertise in the matter, who are good ones to deal with. Thanks for the info!